Pterosaur body mass estimates from three-dimensional mathematical slicing

Henderson, Donald M.

doi:10.1080/02724631003758334

Cited by 67 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One typical set of results is shown in figure 3. In order to compare and quantify the effects of the different wing section characteristics, the lift : drag relationships were used to calculate the flight performance of a notional three-dimensional pterosaur with a wing area of 2.2 m 2 , wingspan of 5.8 m and mass ranging between 13.9 and 32 kg [10,12,28,29], using the standard techniques of aircraft design [30]. The drag was calculated as the sum of the profile drag measured WP2 WP1 metacarpal ulna Figure 1.…”

Section: (B) Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flight in slow motion: aerodynamics of the pterosaur wing

Palmer

2010

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The flight of pterosaurs and the extreme sizes of some taxa have long perplexed evolutionary biologists. Past reconstructions of flight capability were handicapped by the available aerodynamic data, which was unrepresentative of possible pterosaur wing profiles. I report wind tunnel tests on a range of possible pterosaur wing sections and quantify the likely performance for the first time. These sections have substantially higher profile drag and maximum lift coefficients than those assumed before, suggesting that large pterosaurs were aerodynamically less efficient and could fly more slowly than previously estimated. In order to achieve higher efficiency, the wing bones must be faired, which implies extensive regions of pneumatized tissue. Whether faired or not, the pterosaur wings were adapted to low-speed flight, unsuited to marine style dynamic soaring but adapted for thermal/slope soaring and controlled, low-speed landing. Because their thin-walled bones were susceptible to impact damage, slow flight would have helped to avoid injury and may have contributed to their attaining much larger sizes than fossil or extant birds. The trade-off would have been an extreme vulnerability to strong or turbulent winds both in flight and on the ground, akin to modern-day paragliders.

show abstract

Section: (B) Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flight in slow motion: aerodynamics of the pterosaur wing

Palmer

2010

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These data were used to calculate a range of CM location estimates. In the species examined, large pterodactyloids Pteranodon and Anhanguera, CM falls close to the posterior face of the humerus where it articulates with scapulocoracoid, while analysis of Henderson's wing shape [29] shows that the location of the CP was posterior to this location of CM. We morphed the wing shape to give progressively more and more anterior sweep (while also adjusting the CM location to allow for the movement of the mass of the wing membrane and wing bones), and determined the degree of sweep at which the two centres were coincident (figure 3).…”

Section: Results (A)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coincidence of centre of mass and centre of pressure Bramwell & Whitfield [3] and Henderson [29] have provided estimates of mass (and allocation of mass) and CM for a selection of pterosaur species, and Strang et al [30] presented a mass allocation for Anhanguera. These data were used to calculate a range of CM location estimates.…”

Section: Results (A)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraints on the wing morphology of pterosaurs

Palmer

Dyke

2011

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals that fly must be able to do so over a huge range of aerodynamic conditions, determined by weather, wind speed and the nature of their environment. No single parameter can be used to determine-let alone measure-optimum flight performance as it relates to wing shape. Reconstructing the wings of the extinct pterosaurs has therefore proved especially problematic: these Mesozoic flying reptiles had a soft-tissue membranous flight surface that is rarely preserved in the fossil record. Here, we review basic mechanical and aerodynamic constraints that influenced the wing shape of pterosaurs, and, building on this, present a series of theoretical modelling results. These results allow us to predict the most likely wing shapes that could have been employed by these ancient reptiles, and further show that a combination of anterior sweep and a reflexed proximal wing section provides an aerodynamically balanced and efficient theoretical pterosaur wing shape, with clear benefits for their flight stability.

show abstract

“…Full details on this method for estimating body mass and CM using 3D meshes are presented by Henderson (1999). This method of estimating body mass and CM has been validated with the studies of various extant taxa: alligators (Henderson, 2003), six species of birds ranging in mass from a few grams to tens of kilograms (Henderson, 2010a), elephants (Henderson, 2006a), giraffes and horses (Henderson and Naish, 2010b), and sea turtles (Henderson, 2006b).…”

Section: Body Mass and CMmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balance and Strength—Estimating the Maximum Prey‐Lifting Potential of the Large Predatory Dinosaur Carcharodontosaurus saharicus

Henderson

Nicholls²

2015

The Anatomical Record

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivated by the work of palaeo-art "Double Death (2011)," a biomechanical analysis using three-dimensional digital models was conducted to assess the potential of a pair of the large, Late Cretaceous theropod dinosaur Carcharodontosaurus saharicus to successfully lift a mediumsized sauropod and not lose balance. Limaysaurus tessonei from the Late Cretaceous of South America was chosen as the sauropod as it is more completely known, but closely related to the rebbachisaurid sauropods found in the same deposits with C. saharicus. The body models incorporate the details of the low-density regions associated with lungs, systems of air sacs, and pneumatized axial skeletal regions. These details, along with the surface meshes of the models, were used to estimate the body masses and centers of mass of the two animals. It was found that a 6 t C. saharicus could successfully lift a mass of 2.5 t and not lose balance as the combined center of mass of the body and the load in the jaws would still be over the feet. However, the neck muscles were found to only be capable of producing enough force to hold up the head with an added mass of 424 kg held at the midpoint of the maxillary tooth row. The jaw adductor muscles were more powerful, and could have held a load of 512 kg. The more limiting neck constraint leads to the conclusion that two, adult C. saharicus could successfully lift a L. tessonei with a maximum body mass of 850 kg and a body length of 8.3 m. Anat Rec, 298:1367Rec, 298: -1375Rec, 298: , 2015. V C 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Pterosaur body mass estimates from three-dimensional mathematical slicing

Cited by 67 publications

References 37 publications

Flight in slow motion: aerodynamics of the pterosaur wing

Flight in slow motion: aerodynamics of the pterosaur wing

Constraints on the wing morphology of pterosaurs

Balance and Strength—Estimating the Maximum Prey‐Lifting Potential of the Large Predatory Dinosaur Carcharodontosaurus saharicus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About